Home > Electronic Reading Room > Document Collections > Commission Documents > Commission Papers (SECY) > 2003 > SECY-03-0105

SECY-03-0105

June 24, 2003

• PURPOSE
• BACKGROUND
• DISCUSSION
  • ESP Pre-Application Activities
  • ESP Review Standard
  • ESP Generic Issues
  • ESP Review Schedule and Resources
• CONCLUSIONS
• COORDINATION

PURPOSE:

To inform the Commission of the staff's efforts to prepare for the review of early site permit (ESP) applications from Exelon Generating Company (Exelon), Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy), and Dominion Generation (Dominion).

BACKGROUND:

In SECY-03-0005, "Semi-Annual Update of the Status of New Reactor Licensing Activities," dated January 8, 2003, the staff committed to inform the Commission of any policy issues identified during stakeholder interactions and of staff efforts to resolve these issues prior to receipt of the first ESP application. At this time, the staff has not identified any policy issues requiring Commission action.

DISCUSSION:

In SECY-02-0076, "Semi-Annual Update of the Future Licensing and Inspection Readiness Assessment," dated May 8, 2002, the staff informed the Commission that there were three prospective applicants for an ESP:

• Exelon stated in a March 1, 2002, letter, that it intended to apply for an ESP by June 2003. Exelon announced on April 30, 2002, that the application will be for the Clinton site.

• As documented in an April 1, 2002, meeting summary (ADAMS Accession No. ML021010275), Dominion announced that it will apply for an ESP for the North Anna site by September 2003.

• Entergy stated in an April 15, 2002, letter, that it will submit an ESP application for the Grand Gulf site by June 30, 2003. Entergy has recently informed the staff that its application filing will be delayed until July 2003 due to the need to take more time to complete its seismic evaluations.

Entergy, Exelon, and Dominion have obtained funding from the Department of Energy (DOE) to offset some of their application costs through the Nuclear Power 2010 initiative, as discussed in SECY-03-0005.

ESP Pre-Application Activities

After notification of the utilities' plans to file an ESP application, the staff undertook the following pre-application activities:

• Developed an ESP review standard (as discussed below).

• Developed inspection and administrative procedures necessary to support the ESP review effort.

• Held public meetings with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) and the prospective ESP applicants on generic issues related to application preparation (as discussed below).

• Developed an integrated work schedule and resource estimates (as discussed below).

• Visited sites to observe applicant data-gathering activities and to confer with individual ESP applicants on site-specific issues.

• Reviewed and provided feedback on ESP applicant quality assurance program plans.

• Held pre-application public meetings near the prospective ESP sites. The purpose of these meetings was to provide information regarding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff ESP review process and to explain future opportunities for public involvement in that process. On November 14, 2002, the staff conducted the first near-site pre-application ESP public meeting in Port Gibson, Mississippi, for the Grand Gulf site. Other pre-application ESP public meetings were conducted near the Clinton site on March 20, 2003, and near the North Anna site on April 1, 2003.

The staff will continue to identify reviewers, establish technical assistance contracts, schedule meetings with applicants, and interact with the public and other interested stakeholders as part of the preparations for review of ESP applications.

ESP Review Standard

The staff developed an ESP review standard to (1) clearly define for all stakeholders the scope of the existing regulatory guidance that is necessary for a review of an ESP application, and (2) provide a work-planning framework to enhance the quality and efficiency of the ESP review effort.

On December 26, 2002, the staff released draft ESP Review Standard RS-002, "Processing Applications for Early Site Permits," for public comment and interim use. The public comment period for the subject document ended on March 31, 2003. The draft document may be found at ADAMS Accession No. ML023530045. On April 11, 2003, the staff released, for public comment and interim use, two additional sections of RS-002. The subject areas for these sections are radiological consequence evaluation and quality assurance. The public comment period for these sections ended on June 13, 2003. The staff plans to develop the final review standard by the end of 2003 after reviewing and addressing public comments. With respect to physical security, the staff issued letters to the three prospective ESP applicants on May 6, 2003, to provide guidance on how security measures should be addressed in their applications and inform them of the recently revised design basis threat and reactor interim compensatory measure (ICM) requirements. These letters will be provided to cognizant NRC staff reviewers in lieu of the near-term development of a review standard for physical security. The staff is also developing a paper on Security Requirements for New Reactors, which is due to the Commission in July 2003. The paper will recommend whether additional security design requirements should be applicable to ESPs and discuss resource estimates associated with implementation of the staff proposal.

ESP Generic Issues

The staff held frequent public meetings with NEI and the prospective ESP applicants to discuss generic issues early resolution of which might enhance the timely review and disposition of an ESP application. A process was developed to document the staff and industry positions. The principal issues were as follows:

• quality assurance requirements for ESP information
• use of the bounding plant parameter envelope (PPE) approach to characterize facility design
• radiological consequence evaluation required by 10 CFR 52.17
• use of the bounding approach for providing fuel cycle and transportation information required by 10 CFR Part 51
• review of severe accidents and severe accident mitigation alternatives
• alternative site review to meet requirements of 10 CFR Part 52
• form and content of an ESP

While differences remain between the staff and industry positions on some of the topics discussed, these topics will be resolved during the staff's review of the site-specific applications. If necessary, RS-002 will be revised to reflect the staff's resolution of these or other topics addressed in the site-specific reviews. The three prospective ESP applicants have not indicated that any staff position has impeded or deterred the scheduled filing of their application. The ESP generic issues are discussed in the attachment .

ESP Review Schedule and Resources

In SECY-03-0005, the staff estimated that the review of an ESP application would take approximately 33 months from the submittal of the application to the granting of the permit. This estimate assumes that the applicant provides a high-quality application and that the issues to be addressed at the mandatory public hearing are not overly complex or contentious.

The staff has developed an integrated work schedule process which utilizes a planning tool to document the process steps necessary for the ESP review and to assign critical skills and resources to each step.

The staff will continue to closely monitor the status of the potential ESP applications. In the event of application delays, adjustments to the resource requirements will be made through the staff's planning, budgeting, and performance management (PBPM) process, with consideration of other agency needs and priorities.

In FY 2003, the staff expects to expend about 6.4 FTE and $744,000 to support pre-application activities and initiation of ESP application reviews. Estimated resource needs increase in FY 2004 to 19.7 FTE and $4,082,000 for review of the three ESP applications.

CONCLUSIONS:

The staff is prepared to review the ESP applications that Exelon, Entergy, and Dominion are expected to file in June, July and September 2003. The staff held ESP pre-application public meetings, to discuss key issues with NEI and the expected applicants. Public meetings were conducted near the prospective sites to inform the public about the ESP process and opportunities for public participation. A draft ESP review standard was published to inform stakeholders of the scope of the staff's review and to enhance the quality and efficiency of the ESP review effort. Development of the review standard will continue with the goal of improving the efficiency, effectiveness, and realism of the subject ESP staff reviews and ensuring that an appropriate level of safety is maintained for the proposed sites.

COORDINATION:

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this paper and has no legal objection. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this paper for resource implications and has no objections to its content.

Attachment:

Staff Assessment of Key NEI Generic ESP Positions

Privacy Policy | Site Disclaimer
Thursday, February 22, 2007